Lately I am in need of a reminder of why I want to go to The Amazing Meeting. What is in it for me as a woman without a science background who has an interest in skeptical subjects but isn’t making a career out of it? Is there any reason for me to go when I’m continuously bummed out by the comments section of all the interesting blogs –especially when anything relating to things that matter to me are brushed off as irrelevant beaten horses? It’s not just that I’m a woman; I was an English major & visual art minor. Liberal Arts? The horror!
I feel like the lowest of the low sometimes even at events I’ve co-organized. Last Friday at our Drinking Skeptically it took me several minutes to convince an English grad student that he was welcome and needn’t be apologetic about his major! That’s when it clicked: I don’t feel welcome, or like anything I would contribute would be valued. And after months of being completely frustrated by comment threads at various blogs and forums, I feel like a lot of those folks attending would agree with my low estimation of my worth in this community. Do I want to spend a large chunk of money and my limited vacation time to socialize with them?
I’m really not so sure.
This is much more negative than I initially intended, but it’s been stewing for a while and it’s been keeping me from reading and being an active participant in communities I feel like I’ve previously gotten a lot from. And that is bullshit that needs to stop.
And it’s not as if the skeptical community doesn’t need writers and artists. Specifically graphic designers. Have you seen some of these websites?
Yeah. I said it.
You know, I feel this way too sometimes. It’s interesting that we both have been running Drinking Skeptically for so long and neither of us have a science background. I often feel like I can only talk to people at DS for so long until they “figure me out” – realize that I’m not a biologist or a programmer – and then I won’t be interesting anymore.
Thing is, I went to TAM and I met some creative folks. They were certainly far and few between, but they were there. I still did get a few looks from folks when I told them I was a “writer” (FSM forbid I admit to being a POET, which I am). I think this relates to how we can bring science and this community to the general public. Not everyone is a scientist, nor should everyone be one. But if we want to broaden this community, we have to be more inclusive and offer more at events like TAM that will keep folks outside of the sciences coming back for more.
Have you seen the folks in Central PA and their group on meetup? They have a meetup for for artists/creative types who are humanist/skeptics. Pretty sweet! Maybe we can create THAT group!
If you do come to TAM, be sure to hide your boobies. They make the menfolks nervous.
My degree is Libreral Studies. My emphasis was American Literature.
I’ve met many artists, writers and philosophers at TAM. It’s not just for science geeks or geeks at all. It’s for anyone who wants to explore what’s real and what isn’t with other folks on a similar mission.
My girlfriend and I have attended that last 3 TAMs and have always had a tremendous time and have sworn to go to every TAM until they end or we do. After attending TAM6 I was influenced to start a skeptics group in the Sacramento Area. My favorite part about TAM are the people that you meet there. I have made friends at TAM that I would not have had the opportunity to meet otherwise. In addition to this I am a Political Science major and my girlfriend is an English major.
I generally do not participate in forums or in the comments section of blogs. I am more of a stalker on the Randi Forum just to see what events I can find. I am saddened by you experiance on these and am disappointed that it may be fellow skeptics that has lead to this.
In my experiance TAM is well worth the trip and cost.
I understand your discomfort; one of the smartest people I know (who has 2 BAs, one in anthropology which, last I heard, is a science) is intimidated by some of the discussion online. However, I’m going to give it you straight, just as I gave it to her.
PARTIAL list of people who stood on the stage @ TAM7, are not scientists or even in a science field aside from work in skepticism, yet did not appear to be there for no reason (meaning Bill Prady):
Jeff Wagg: already chimed in above
D.J. Grothe – writer/magician/podcaster
Jennifer Ouellette – writer
Adam Savage – special effects artist
Hal Bidlack – retired military/history prof/politician
Jamy Ian Swiss – magician
Penn and Teller – both magicians
Michael Goudeau – juggler/writer/former circus clown :O!
Derek Bartholomaus – “Post Guy” (post production work in television)
Robert Langdon – Honestly don’t know what he did for a living before retiring, but he’s a “citizen skeptic” and has been honored recently as such.
Steve Cuno – marketing guru
Brian Dunning – difficult to nail down; venture capital consulting?
Tim Farley – software engineer
Christian Walters – tech writer
Adam Slagell – security engineer
Rebecca Watson – writer/podcaster/organizer
Alison Smith – former private investigator/writer/research assistant
The Amazing Randi Himself is a magician, not a scientist
Poetry is actually considered quite cool in some skeptic circles. Check out Digital Cuttlefish: http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/
I met a massage therapist TAM7. We had a terrific talk & are now friends.
Here’s the bottom line:
If you feel uncomfortable about fitting in and you believe that it is more than your own insecurities talking, choose better friends.
I run into people every day who say, “He’s a musician/artist/writer, so what does he know about biology?” Hell, I even hear, “You’re a psychologist, so why should I listen to you about physics?” These are people who do not understand science and skepticism themselves. They are superior only in their own minds.
What you do for a living, in my eyes, is not relevant.
However, skepticism and science are very, very closely related, so that’s where the discussions at these things need to be, imo. My emphasis on science is not snobbery; as Carl Sagan said, there are no authorities in science. Skepticism and science are ways of life, not just professions.
You do not need to know what “gambler’s fallacy” is. In fact, I love educating intelligent, interesting people what I have learned through my research and studies and LOVE being educated about what they have learned just by thinking critically. It helps me to form hypotheses which I can then test (scientifically).
Come to TAM8. If I haven’t put you off with my “Get over it” rant (which is really just my way of being direct; you’ll get used to it), then hang out with me. I’ll make you a T-Shirt that says:
“I’m into art and literature. If you don’t like that, bite me.”
On the front, and
“In science, there are no authorities.”
on the back. Okay?
sorry so long – I feel strongly about this
My background is History, the least useful of the Liberal Arts ;)
I would love to go to TAM someday but I would be intimidated as hell just as much and largely for the same reasons. That wouldn’t stop me from going, though. You may indeed encounter people who will deride your lack of ‘appropriate’ background but those people aren’t the ones who matter at TAM.
As all the prior commenters have noted, you’ve nothing to feel inferior about. If you have an interest in skepticism, you are part of the community. And in every community there are some jerks. Ignore them and interact with the non-jerks.
As someone with a background in English and Art background you do bring to the table much needed skills. Every community that wishes to communicate effectively needs people who can write clearly and concisely (or edit others, a woefully lacking function in the blogosphere and in particular in this comment) and design media and interfaces that are more aesthetically pleasing than what is common on many science-oriented sites.
As a side note I worked for two years on a team of the most geeky, skeptical, hardcore brilliant software architects and developers/designers. Amongst the five of us there was a whopping one Comp Sci degree. The rest were all MFA’s and one History major (myself).
You need to party more in Cbus. We have a fair amount of techie people, but most of us are science softies. :)
I’m just reposting what I said over at Amy’s Skepchick post for now:
Ok, finally not at work!
It’s not so much that I feel intimidated or that I don’t feel smart enough. What makes me feel like I perhaps don’t fit in is that I’m often uncomfortable with the sentiments made by some folks in online skeptical outlets. (Even sometimes the comments at Skepchick.)
One of the discussions that has resurfaced since TAM7 is how to encourage more women to get involved while at the same time there were lots of conversations going that made this woman want to stay far, far away. (And I’m not really an outsider, so I can’t help but think about how someone new would feel.)
Examples? In general threads that touch on rape, gender, or racism. There seems to be this mental block for some people where they cannot fathom others’ feelings, and that when they’ve personally decided that something is no longer an issue that everyone else should “be rational” and get over it. Being dismissive seems counter to critical thinking (and to skeptical outreach) as does assuming you already know everything there is to know about a social or cultural subject you’ve only delved into academically. (Sam’s AI is very timely!)
So it’s not just that I feel like arts/humanities are being undervalued (and to an extent, I think they are not taken as seriously) but I have encountered attitudes like “because I Get Science I get all the easy stuff you people do” as well as “my big giant brain could not possibly be wrong about how you should feel.”
Oh oh crap –I’ve not addressed all of the really great thoughts on this thread but that’s all I can manage until after Torchwood.
I don’t know if you should go to TAM or not. I don’t even know if you should blog or not (I haven’t read anything but this article so don’t take that personally). But you don’t have to be a scientist to be a sceptic or to blog or, apparently, to go to TAM.
My only qualification is in painting signs. Beyond that I’ve worked in graphic art and fine art, both successfully, both unqualified.
I’ve learnt more about biology since I began blogging scepticism last year than I’d ever known before – and I’m somewhere around 50. I’m no biologist.
In fact, I’ve learnt a lot about science in general.
Would I go to TAM? I don’t know. Firstly it’s about 20,000km away or something and secondly, even if it were closer, it’s very expensive. If neither of those are an issue for you, it’s hard to imagine the experience would be particularly horrible, especially if you get to meet up with online people you DO admire.
Just my 20 cents (two cents just never seems enough these days).
I feel like my last comment on Amy’s post (perhaps) clarifies my intent, so I wanted to copy it here where I think it fits as well:
I absolutely agree with you. It’s unfortunate that my post comes across as anti-TAM, when it really should’ve begun “Lately I am in need of a reminder of why I want to be part of the skeptical community,” and then gone on to talk about how questions about getting more women involved in things like TAM made me think about why I’ve been not participating in discussions and avoiding events I’d normally be keen on, and delving deeper still, whether or not I “fit in”/feel comfortable with the skeptic label. And then I should have really emphasized that I’m not going to let a few jerkstores spoil the stripmall.
Honestly I am positive I would enjoy TAM. I love our local CFI events and I have a blast cohosting Pittsburgh’s Drinking Skeptically with Laura. It would be a lot of fun hanging out with my online friends. I meant no offense to TAM/JREF — it just happened to be the most recent event and the one I’m most likely to attend. And I think actually going to something big like TAM is making a statement that skepticism is important to you. So that’s what I was questioning –how much of myself am I willing to put into this? Does that make sense?
Podblack Blog. Written by a double-major in English Literature and Philosophy, Grad Dip in Secondary Education (English, ESL and Media), M.Ed in gifted and talented education, currently completing a second M.Ed in educational psychology.
Hope you check it out – I contribute to the Skeptic Zone podcast and the ‘What to do Next?: Leading Skeptics Give105 Ways to Promote Science and Advance Skepticism’ produced by Skeptic.com.
English major. Creative Writing minor. Skeptic since January ’08.
And I am SO glad to hear that someone else feels this way.